Skip to main content
2:00 pm
no other development project gets a spare acre to park equipment. but actually, as i look around the room and i hear some of the feedback we've gotten all weekend, i believe the issue probably is covered and i want to take just one second to address the larger implication of some of our decisions to the [speaker not understood] in this room. we are a rapidly growing organization. we have come together as a network of urban farmers, dedicated to helping all of our commutes to create and maintain urban agriculture as a part of san francisco. from the thousands of back yards, front yards, sidewalks, window sills and balconies all over town to the many urban farms that i see represented here today, including 18th and rhode island, alemeny farm, me rammed city, the free farm stand, to growing home community garden as well as
2:01 pm
garden for the environment, raise the roof, the little city garden, [speaker not understood], please touch community garden, eco sf school farm at the school of the arts, the veggie table at third and pa lou, the treasure island [speaker not understood], the farm that recently got together at the has valley playground and hayes valley farm. we recognize that successful communities are a part of a sustainable environment. we recognize our responsibility to all the relationships that make -- and we will make decisions with all of these thoughts in mind as our integral communities include our volunteers, our supporters, our partners, and the folks who live right around us. >> i'm sorry, but the other one gets two minutes. so, we may call you back up afterwards to have you finish your statement. but we have to sort of -- i want to thank the general opportunity for community input, for community
2:02 pm
participation and for neighborhood feedback. >> we're with you completely. we'll call you back up if you need to finish the statement. hi, my name is jim warshel and i've been involved with all of these temporary use projects through my engagement with hayes valley neighborhood association. i have to tell you, all of them, proxy, the homeless connect gardens and the farm have been tremendously successful. and just this past weekend i was the speaker, i was invited to speak at a state conference at cca talking about sustainable development. and people were blown away when they heard about what was being done here in all three of these types of temporary uses. i've also had the opportunity to participate in the negotiations with the city and rec and park on finding the new
2:03 pm
home for the farm. and it has been so gratifying to see the integrity and professionalism that the farm community has shown in going into these and acknowledging that this has always been temporary. they would honor all their commitments and look to move forward. this has been a remarkable, remarkable community. it really brings me at this point to go back to part of supervisor olague's opening comments, which i think are right on target, that activation of the space for along as it's feasible is the goal. and, you know, as was just stated, nobody gets an extra acre to park trucks on when they're doing construction. we have construction all over our neighborhood because of these other sites.
2:04 pm
they take out either other lots that are parking lots. they take out street parking. they go permits. this is unprecedented. when you look at this site, when you reestablish the alley way between them, fence it off and have always a viable farm entity until it's ready for the other -- >> thank you. that's the way to go. thank you. >> thank you. brent jones, followed by peter cohan. and david schner. supervisors, my name is brent jones. i'm a graphic artist who has lived two blocks away for 28 years. i also work for the giants for the past eight, so i'm a little out of it right now. but i understand that the plot has been sold and i appreciate the efforts of jay and these other people. but when i moved into hayes valley, you couldn't pay to live that neighborhood.
2:05 pm
you couldn't get cable companies to put cable in because it wasn't densely enough populated. since i've been there, i didn't do a powerpoint, this is all-new residential. there's a lot of new residential coming in. and i know that there was a hearing on this in june. it kind of went into my radar when i read bought new developments going in blocks away from me. about a month ago they cut all these trees down to build the condos, future units at grove and goff. if you've ever gone by the farm area, it in itself is an urban oasis and i understand economic development, you know, i feel affordable housing is an oxymoron in this town. anything is driven p by that. i think in the short term gain as compared to long-term benefits, you know, it would be nice if that could be a public park. if you go all the way to the bay and come down this way to the corridor, there are numerous big parks. this lot is half that size, but these trees are irreplacable.
2:06 pm
and i know for instance, i know randal pine, 30 years, he demolished two old buildings to build the jazz fest and cut down trees to plant smaller ones. so, you lose 80 foot trees for eight-foot trees that will take 50 years for them to grow again. i won't see it in my lifetime. patricia's green is a dog run and kiddie park. the palm trees are dying. there were big trees they cut down there for that. so, i'm just asking as a resident for quality of life issue if there was anyway eminent domain, whatever you have to do, i know you put 5.8 million of renovation diamond heights, glenn canyon park. there's 10 million for lafayette park. i mean, you know, i understand economic development, but quality of life, you know. it's getting pretty dense over here. take five blocks, you can see all the new development and, you know, i love my neighborhood. it's getting a little out of hand. >> thank you. sit under a tree, read a
2:07 pm
book. it would be nice. i've got photos here, patricia's green. >> thank you. but it's not a park. anyway, thank you. >> thank you. good afternoon, supervisors. peter cohan from council community organizations. came to talk about the revised true up. i'm glad to hear there is less of a controversy than there was back in april. i think as it was said, the redevelopment agency using affordable housing money overpaid for parcels purposely so there would be capital build to boulevard. on a personal note i lived in hayes valley and was active in the process of bringing the free ways down and enjoyed the octavia boulevard itself. but where that capital came from wasn't affordable housing money so the true up was a very significant part of returning that favor, if you will. and i'm glad to hear that is no
2:08 pm
longer contested. that said the number is smaller. we've gone from a 13.$25 million true up to a 9.8. that is a little under $4 million less money going back for those -- early parcel sales which in turn means less revenue to return the affordable housing funding. * but if that's what it takes, then okay. we do have some concern, though, that that number be solid, and my understanding is that these specifications you saw in your presentation will be immemorialized in an m-o-u so there will be greater stability. i do have, if anybody would care on the board, a 2009 memo from office of economic development at the time that the board of supervisors at that point laid up the true up deal. hopefully the m-o-u will be very firm. we also really think it would be a good idea to have an annual hearing or some sort of frequency to talk about the progress of octavia, the land
2:09 pm
sales, and the allocations of these funds. and also the mayor's office of housing, oewd and dpw work together, again, shared responsibility for the accounting on these funds going forward. thanks so much. thank you, supervisors. my name is david schner, director for [speaker not understood]. we were developers of parcel g which was mentioned. we appreciate your acknowledgment of the national and international recognition the building has gotten. you can see the building from city hall. i'd like to second peter cohan's comments about concerns about the drop in the amount of money to be repaid to affordable housing purposes. there is a continued need for affordable housing throughout the city including in the central freeway parcels, parcels o and u will likely
2:10 pm
both require city resources from general city affordable housing sources. so, to see the amount of money being repaid dropping from 17 to 13.2 and now to $9.8 million is certainly a concern. i'm glad to note that the agreement is that if there should be more than $9.8 million left over the additional funds will go back to the mayor's office of housing. should the other projects, the additional improvements, van ness improvements cost more than is currently budgeted, does that mean the money comes from a firedable housing fund? is affordable housing the last priority for the use of funds that were in fact the low mod housing dollars in the first place? i'd ask the board to keep very careful watch on that. * the city is pushing, we're all working together towards the passage of proposition c because there has been a loss of affordable housing dollars throughout the city. i think this would be a very
2:11 pm
difficult time to say that we should be taking funds away from affordable housing uses. so, i'd ask the board to carefully monitor the ongoing progress of those projects and make sure that funds are available to replenish the low mod dollars in the city. thank you. >> thank you. robin levitt followed by sharon colt, william pickle or pickel. good afternoon, supervisors. robin levitt from hayes valley neighborhood association. i'm a long-time resident of hayes valley. i was also the co-chair with the late patricia walk up of the three campaigns to replace central freeway with octavia boulevard. i spent many of my years working on this project and still involved in it. and i just want to point out, and we all heard this,
2:12 pm
proposition i that passed the voters passed in 1999, i'm just going to paraphrase it because i don't have much time. after construction of octavia boulevard, it says the city shall utilize any remaining proceeds from the sale and/or disposition of the excess central freeway parcels for a transportation improvements to corridors on or ancillary to octavia boulevard. there have been some projects funded from the fund, funds realized from the sale of these parcels. they're all south of market. but if we look north of market consistently we have very problematic intersections that are still yet to be resoderv. we have oak and octavia and market and ok thaiv why which are consistently the most dangerous intersections in the city. in addition to that, every morning in my neighborhood we have traffic backing up on page, haight street, laguna street, and other streets in the neighborhood with road rage
2:13 pm
drivers. i was assaulted two years ago at the corner of laguna and page and sent to the hospital with a concussion. by a road rage driver there. the point is there are many transportation issues that have still not been addressed in this area * . and yet we're talking about funneling money from the sale of these parcels back for affordable housing. now, i'm a big supporter of affordable housing, but this notion of true up is something new to me. i was on the central freeway cac when [speaker not understood] was handling these sales and there was never any mention about a true up. and if you look at the sale of those parcels, the cost of those parcels that the redevelopment agency paid versus the market rate parcels, you'll see they paid much, much less than the market rate parcels. so, i just want to point this out. until we have completed the
2:14 pm
octavia boulevard project and dealt with these transportation issues, we shouldn't be talking about using money for affordable housing. it wasn't intended to be used for that purpose. thank you very much. good afternoon and thank you for your time. i've been a volunteer with hayes valley farm since its inception in january 2010, and i'm there pretty much every week. [speaker not understood] through some changes. almost universally the people in the neighborhood have come and thanked us for making it a safe [inaudible]. grandparents or children. but we also have visitors from other countries. we've had, what would you say,
2:15 pm
field trips from ecuador, indonesia, farmers from scandinavia, germany, asia, pakistan, india, and if they have time they take classes with us. and we have become one of the prototypes in the world of normal farming. these teenagers, children and adults, they take this back to their own homes. so, they feel a sense of personal empowerment. it is good for the neighborhood, but it's a small world. every part of the world is part of our neighborhood also. not just young school kids, preschoolers. they come in and they have a
2:16 pm
[speaker not understood] and they take off with it. can't do oh, you're too little, you're too sweet. but they're strong and they're learning. it's an asset not only to the neighborhood, but the rest of the city. the kids from bayview, the mission, pacific heights, the local french school, the wealthy kid. let's keep it. i've been in construction and i know how much [speaker not understood]. the parking lot would do. >> thank you. [speaker not understood] the farm for us. good afternoon, supervisors. my name is william pickle. i'm the executive director of west bay housing and octavia court, inc., west bay was the co-sponsor and is the co-owner of deputy of the court, hud
2:17 pm
section 81 1 property which provides supportive affordable and accessible housing for 14 households, person with developmental disability and also an on-site arts-based day program and open gallery which had its first open community event just last week. the project would not have been possible without tremendous collaboration amongst multiple city agencies, tremendous support from sfra, now mo. also tremendous support and advocacy from hayes valley neighborhood association. i'd like to second peter cohan's comments around imperative to really keep the conversation open around the funding available for affordable housing. it is a terrible time statewide. octavia court had three major sources of funding, hud 11, sfra tax increment set aside, and state bond financing through the multi-family housing program. all of those sources are
2:18 pm
unavailable now. so, the nuances of the true up and the legalities around it are beyond my knowledge, but i would say that octavia court doesn't happen without great conversations around sometimes competing community development objectessv that are managed by different agentv size. i'd like to see that kind of dialogue continue. * agencies i will say one note about the farm. they've been a great neighbor to octavia court and its residents. and i assume that when it's developed when parcel o is developed for affordable family housing that's also going to enrich the neighborhood for octavia court residents. again, i would like to see dialogue continue for a win/win outcome there. thank you very much for your time. >> thank you. [speaker not understood], jo anna bonheim. are there any additional public
2:19 pm
comment? * good afternoon, robert joyce. i am a resident of d5, homeowner, i live five blocks away from parcel o and i'm here speaking on behalf of myself. thank you, supervisors. thank you to the presenters. couple quick things. a lot has been said already. i would like to submit to the record something i posted in the spur website. their report that then i quote, we understand that the hayes valley farm currently located on parcel o is soon to be moved and we urge the project sponsors to work with the city to prolong the farm's tenancy until such time as parcel o can be developed. i am very pleased to hear from mr. rich today, if i reder correctly, that hayes valley farm was going to continue to be there until june 1st. that's great news. my question is what happens after that. and i would like to see an open community process where we can
2:20 pm
do what's best for all the communities involved. it's been said before that the idea of having an urban agriculture going on is unsafe. i think that's an opinion. i think intelligent people can disagree about that. and that compromises can be found. it's a very large site. i think we can find safe places to have urban agriculture existing on part of the parcel while construction is going on while hickory street is being extended. certainly the people whose home border right on it on the eastern side would hope that it would be safe for their homes to remain there. i would also like on the question of what is going to go on during construction also submit something from the planning department the exemption from the environmental review that was submitted in june. and i quote, "the project would not involve removal of projects from adjacent o to the [speaker not understood].
2:21 pm
protect trees on parcel o during construction for the direction of the certified arborist." i think that gives a road nab to what parts of parcel o may be appropriate for urban agriculture to [speaker not understood]. thank you for your time. >> thank you. my name is [speaker not understood] bonheim. i'm a volunteer at hayes valley farm. i don't live in hayes valley. i live in the tenderloin where there's no accessible green space for residents to enjoy. i don't think it can be underestimated the importance of the feel of community, but [speaker not understood] by the productive green space. hayes valley farm gives back to the neighborhood on so many levels through the beautification, citizen involvement, education, and through the donation of food and more. so, i'm asking that this parcel continue to be used as a farm for as long as possible and
2:22 pm
certainly not the eyesore of a parking lot. thanks. hi, [speaker not understood]. i live pretty close to hayes valley farm and i just wanted to say that i appreciate that the city ask county is making the effort to find another location. * and however, i don't believe that it's -- i mean, it's definitely enhanced the neighborhood dramatically. i think that all of the neighbors appreciate it being there. and you've heard so many speakers already, and i know that there are probably hundreds of other people throughout the city who would speak in favor of keeping it there as long as possible. i don't think that having construction equipment parked there and taking the farm out is the answer in the short term. i just reiterate, i don't think it's a safety issue.
2:23 pm
i really think that other places for parking construction equipment can be found. so, i really would urge the board to take an active role in keeping it there for as long as possible and making all the efforts that you can to find another location eventually when affordable housing is built there. thank you. good afternoon, supervisors. my name is [speaker not understood] from the council of community housing organizations. first of all i want to thank all of you as co-sponsors of proposition c and the supporters of affordable housing. [speaker not understood] ken rich to talk about octavia boulevard, that a full build out will have 50% of the units as affordable housing, senior housing, formerly homeless housing, special needs housing, family housing, transitional age youth housing.
2:24 pm
want to reiterate the narrative of how octavia boulevard came to be. that at a time of low filled or when the city was not quite prepared to sell properties at a low market, the pre-purchases of sites for affordable housing made octavia boulevard possible. $17 million of the $23 million to develop, construct, and maintain the boulevard came from the affordable housing redevelopment agency low mod funds. of those and in that original agreement, the agency and now mayor's office of housing were to be reimbursed from those sales in the event that excess funds were available after the completion of octavia boulevard. in 2009, the mayor's office of economic development by rich projected $13.25 million that were going to go back to the mayor's office of affordable housing which made possible the
2:25 pm
construction of octavia boulevard to be able to afforda i'd like to enter this memo for the record, a 2009 memo from the office of economic work force development. at this point as you heard today, we are talking about 9.8 million rather than the original amount. things change. that is fine. that's what i guess we need to live with. i think what we need to understand, though, is just as affordable housing does its part to support [speaker not understood] improvement in the future as new affordable housing developments, we're hoping we can see a little bit of the same support coming from the transportation sector toward affordable housing. thank you very much. calvin welch, san francisco information clearinghouse. i'm of the old school of affordable housing advocacy. i'm not nice. going from 17 million to 9.8
2:26 pm
million is simply silly policy. if you can't trust the city, when is a deal a deal? this came before this board because of parcel f. parcel f is being sold at less than market rate with no objection to a market rate developer with no objection from advocates when it involves market rate housing development. but when it involves repaying affordable housing development, we're told there's major problems with proposition i. proposition i wasn't cited when the city didn't have enough money to make the improvements, came to the redevelopment agency, took $17 million of affordable housing money to principally benefit the existing residents of that part of the world. all power to them. when is a deal a deal? you are currently contemplating a new transportation
2:27 pm
sustainability fee which contemplates charging a fee for affordable housing development. folks, this is not good policy, to pit affordable housing against transit does not make sense. finally, it also does not make sense to remove from parcel o a function garden, urban agricultural garden. to do phasing for market rate development. keep parcel o in its current use. work hard to repay as much of the $17 million for affordable housing. and thank you for your support for proposition c. we'll see you on the transit sustainability fee. bye-bye. i knew you were a city in
2:28 pm
white ♪ how did you make the item turn outright we're going riding on the octavia freeway of love with the wind against our backs we're going riding on the freeway of love and nothing's holding us back and i know you're gonna make it work outright oh, you're gonna see the light and we're going riding on the freeway of love with the wind against our backs we're going riding on the freeway of love and we're holding nothing back we're going riding ♪ >> are there any additional public comments? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> thank you. so, colleagues, are there any questions? i'd like to ask one for olson
2:29 pm
lee and ms. yunga. some of the affordable advocates raised questions about the true up amount from 17 million dropped to 13.2 and the amount in our -- the ordinance before us is 9.8 million. could you talk about how we're going to ensure that we're going to have the maximum amount for affordable housing in the city? >> thank you. thank you very much. olson lee, director of the mayor's office of housing. the memo that was cited by fernando really was the understanding early on in the process. i think that the notion of the amount of the van ness improvements were probably accurate a while ago, but things have changed on the transportation side. i k

October 29, 2012 2:00pm-2:30pm PDT

TOPIC FREQUENCY Us 4, Peter Cohan 4, Patricia 3, The City 3, San Francisco 2, Brent Jones 2, Robin Levitt 2, Olson Lee 2, Hud 2, Bayview 1, Pacific 1, Cca 1, The Farm 1, Asia 1, Powerpoint 1, Germany 1, Lafayette 1, Grove 1, Ecuador 1, Indonesia 1
Network SFGTV
Duration 00:30:00
Scanned in San Francisco, CA, USA
Source Comcast Cable
Tuner Channel 89 (615 MHz)
Video Codec mpeg2video
Audio Cocec ac3
Pixel width 528
Pixel height 480
Sponsor Internet Archive
Audio/Visual sound, color